The University of Queensland CIVL3210 Geotechnical Engineering Slope Stability

Slope stability
Youll find lots of photos and information about landslides and slope stability here:

http://www.king.ac.uk/~ce_s011/slides.htm
http://landslides.usgs.gov/html_files/nlicsun.html

Why are we concerned about the stability of slopes?

- Cause a major geological hazard Loss of life, economic impact
- Design of cuttings, embankments, dams etc

Examples of engineering problems involving slope stability

Rock falls

Natural Slopes
Construction on slope - load to crest
Excavation near toe
Change pore pressure

Embankments / cuttings
Dams, Roads

Waste tips
Stability of waste
Stability of tailings lagoons (dam)

Dr Robert Day, The University of Queensland, 2009

The University of Queensland CIVL3210 Geotechnical Engineering Slope Stability

Types of slide

Mass movement - Movement of masses of geological material in response to gravity

Valley rebound - small elastic movements due to stress relief

Creep - Continuous on going displacement under constant stress conditions

Subsidence mining, solution of strata

Slips and falls - occur on slopes when the imposed stresses in the material exceed the
available strength. They occur in both natural and man-made slopes

Slips and falls

Slides movement of largely intact mass on a discrete shear surface
Falls / toppling immediate separation and falling of material
Flows disaggregated material

Large mass movement often change as they progress

Falls / toppling
- Very steep slopes
- Undermining, Thermal action, weathering, water
- Forms scree or talus at base of slope

Slides Translational and Rotational

- Strong materials (rock) mainly translational (on weak planes)
- Weak materials (soil) mainly rotational (shear through material)
- Internal distortion of mass
- Multiple slides

Flows much greater internal deformation - flow like a fluid

Typically in loose non-cohesive materials but can also occur in certain cohesive soils
Large run-outs and high velocities
Little theory use hazard identification and avoidance

Analysis of slope stability

Failure occurs if:

Too high
Too steep
Strength too low
Pore pressure too high

Gravity is main causing force

Shear strength of soil is main resistance
No code of practice
Need to satisfy the four conditions
- Equilibrium, compatibility, material strength law, boundary conditions

Dr Robert Day, The University of Queensland, 2009

The University of Queensland CIVL3210 Geotechnical Engineering Slope Stability

Difficult to satisfy all 4 - Many solutions methods with different assumptions

Mostly 3-D dish / teaspoon shape but we do 2-D analysis (plane strain)

Use limit equilibrium methods (like Coulombs method for earth pressure)

Measure stability in terms of a factor of safety Many possibilities

Fh = critical height / actual height = Hc / H

Fs = shear strength / shear stress required = ( c + tan ) /

F = Actual tan for the material / mobilised tan = tan / tan m

(full c assumed or c = 0)

Fc = actual cohesion / mobilised cohesion = c / cm

(full assumed or = 0)

Fm = Sum of resisting moments (or forces) / Sum of disturbing moments (or forces)

The mobilised tan and mobilised cohesion are the minimum values of the strength
parameters that are required to just maintain equilibrium. For example if a value of cohesion <
25 is not strong enough but cohesion 25 will maintain equilibrium, then the cm = 25. If the
actual strength, c = 30, then the Fc = 30/25 = 1.2

Note:
F and Fc are factors of safety on material strength parameters and as such may be thought of
as partial factors in the limit state design methods.
Fs is also a partial factor on strength in the sense of limit state methods.

Examples
- Planar slip - Simple case
o Sliding of wedge
o Critical height of vertical cut
o Infinite slope

sat w tan
Fs =
sat tan

Dr Robert Day, The University of Queensland, 2009

The University of Queensland CIVL3210 Geotechnical Engineering Slope Stability

For a wet slope, Fs is about that of a dry slope

- Circular slip
x
Failure often occurs on a curved surface.
Assume it is a circle. In soft clays this is nearly
correct.

S.R R
Fm = W
W.x
S
Drained

S = (c + tan ) R d
0

Undrained (cu is constant, homogeneous soil)

S = R cu

- Non circular slip

Example

x
R

W1
P1 P2
W2
S1/Fs
S2/Fs

Use factor of safety on strength, Fs

Note: at equilibrium, P1 = P2 = inter-wedge force

S1
Moment equilibrium of Block 1 gives: W1 .x = R + P1 .y
Fs
S2
Horiz. Equilibrium of block 2 gives: P1 =
Fs

Two equations, 2 unknowns (P1 and Fs) solve for Fs

Dr Robert Day, The University of Queensland, 2009

The University of Queensland CIVL3210 Geotechnical Engineering Slope Stability

Alternatively

Define F = P2 / P1

P1 is the force needed to just keep block 1 stable

P2 is the force needed to just move block 2

Moment equil. of block 1

X force equil. of block 2

W1.x = S1.R + P1.y

P2 = S2

F = S2.y / (W1.x S1.R)

Total stress analysis

Undrained, Short term, purely cohesive behaviour

Slip circle analysis

R 2 cu cu R
Fm = or W.x = R
W.x Fs
ie Fm = Fs

May or may not include tension cracks

Must search for the most critical circle (if = 0 the centre of the circle will be above
the centre of the slope)

Partially submerged slopes

Must include external water force on the slope.

If static water this is equivalent to using soil unit weight = w below the water table.

Taylor stability numbers (also other similar solutions)

Total stress analysis, homogeneous soil, cu constant

No tension cracks
No water (unless completely submerged)

Solutions are presented in terms of the

stability Number, Ns where H nH
DH
c
N s = m , where cm is the mobilised shear
H
strength
Hard

Dr Robert Day, The University of Queensland, 2009

The University of Queensland CIVL3210 Geotechnical Engineering Slope Stability

Geometrically similar slopes have the same critical failure circle

cu
Can incorporate a factor of safety by writing: N s =
F H
Charts can be used to determine:
Factor of safety for existing slopes
Design of a slope for a given Fs

Taylors stability coefficients

0.30

0.261
0.25

D=
0.20
infinite 0.181
Ns = c u / F H

0.15
3.0
2.0 Toe circles
0.10
1.5
0.05
1.0

0.00
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Slope inclination,

Notes:
Toe circles are failure circles that pass through the toe of the slope. They are NOT the
critical circles for < 53o
For > 53o the critical failure circle is always a toe circle
3.83 c u
For = 90o , Ns = 0.261 This gives H c = is the critical height of a vertical

cut. Compare this with the value of 4cu / obtained using a planar slip surface
(remember Coulombs method for earth pressure analysis) and also from the Rankine
equation when total force = 0

Example calculations

= 45o
H = 20m
= 16 kN/m3
cu = 80 kPa

Dr Robert Day, The University of Queensland, 2009

The University of Queensland CIVL3210 Geotechnical Engineering Slope Stability

Find Fs (say for an existing slope)

From chart for D = 1, Ns = 0.165
0.165 = 80 / {Fs (20) (16)} , Fs = 1.5
for D = 2, Ns = 0.17, Fs = 1.47
if a uniform material the very deep circle governs. cu is likely to increase with depth so it is
more reasonable to limit the value of D

Find for Fs = 1.6 and D = 2 (for design of a slope with specified F of S)

Ns = 80 / {1.6 (20) (16)} = 0.156
18

Effective stress analysis

Drained, long term
Pore pressure is determined from a seepage analysis

Shear strength Sf = c + n tan = c + ( u) tan

c tan
Mobilised Shear strength Sm = +
Fs Fs

The normal stress on the slip surface is unknown and varies around the surface.
The direction, magnitude and line of action of the resultant force is unknown
The F of S is also unknown.
4 unknowns and 3 eqns of equilibrium - Need further equation or assumption to
obtain a solution.

Notes: if the surface is a plane we know the direction of the normal forces.
for total stress analysis with a circular surface we know the line of action of the
resultant is through the centre of the circle.

Friction circle method

Log spiral method
Method of slices

Circular slip surface

Method of slices
A limit equilibrium method
Statically indeterminate - Many variations, differing assumptions

Divide sliding mass into vertical slices (number of slices = n)

Dr Robert Day, The University of Queensland, 2009

The University of Queensland CIVL3210 Geotechnical Engineering Slope Stability

bi

Ei+1
hi Wi
R Xi
Wi Xi+1
Ei
i

li

Look at the problem

Knowns:
Geometry of slope
Soil unit weight, strength parameters
Distribution of pore pressure

Unknowns: number
Magnitude of normal force, P (or P) n
Magnitude of shear force, Si n
Magnitude of inter slice force, X n-1
Magnitude of inter slice force, E n-1
Line of action of P (or P) n
Line of action of inter slice force, E (or E) n-1
Factor of safety, Fs 1
Total 6n - 2

Equations: number
Force equilibrium 2 per slice 2n
Moment equilibrium 1 per slice n
Failure criterion si = c + i tan n
Total 4n

There are 2n 2 two many unknowns so the problem is statically indeterminate. It cannot be
solved without making and additional 2n-2 independent assumptions. Hence there are many
different solution methods based on the method of slices. Some are described below.

Bishop method
(Bishop, AW, The use of the slip circle in the stability analysis of slopes, Geotechnique, 5, 1, 1955, 7-17)

Assume line of action of P is through centre of circle (n assumptions)

(There are still n 2 assumptions we need to make)

Dr Robert Day, The University of Queensland, 2009

The University of Queensland CIVL3210 Geotechnical Engineering Slope Stability

Take moment equilibrium of whole mass

Si S .R
W .x = F .R Hence Fs =
i
= Fm
W .x
i i
s i i

Look at each individual slice

Si = l i (c + ( u i ) tan )
= l i c + (Pi u i l i ) tan

{li c + (Pi u i li ) tan }

R
Fm = Fs = (1)
i i
W .x

Resolving forces in the vertical direction gives the force Pi

Pi cos i + (Si / Fs) sin i = Wi (Xi Xi+1)

Substitute for Si and write in terms of Pi

cl i + Pi tan
Pi cos i + u i l i cos i + sin i = Wi (X i X i+1 )
Fs

tan sin i cl sin i

Pi cos i + = Wi (X i X i +1 ) i u i l i cos i
Fs Fs
cl sin i
Wi (X i X i +1 ) i u i l i cos i
Fs
Pi =
tan sin i
cos i +
Fs

note that xi = R sin i

and letting b = li cos i for convenience,

Equation (1) becomes

Wi (X i X i +1 ) cl i sin i u i l i cos i
1 Fs
Fs = l i c + tan
Wi .sin i
cos i +
tan sin i


Fs

1
(cb i + {Wi (X i X i +1 ) u i b i }tan )
Fs = (2)
Wi .sin i cos i +
tan sin i
Fs

Dr Robert Day, The University of Queensland, 2009

The University of Queensland CIVL3210 Geotechnical Engineering Slope Stability

Traditionally this equation is written making the substitution (see text book):
1 sec i
=

tan sin i tan tan i
cos i + 1+
Fs Fs

The factor of safety Fs is determined by solution of this equation. As it is not possible to

rearrange it to express Fs explicitly it is necessary to solve it iteratively.
In addition we have the equations for horizontal and vertical equilibrium of the sliding mass
as a whole. Ie

(Xi Xi+1) = 0 vertical equilibrium

(Ei Ei+1) = 0 horizontal equilibrium

Procedure
Select distribution of Xi such that (Xi Xi+1) = 0 (n-1 assumptions)
This is 1 too many assumptions, so iteration is needed to find a consistent solution
Solve eqn (2) for Fs
Check (Ei Ei+1) = 0
If not try another distribution of Xi until it is
Check moment equilibrium of each slice and of whole mass
Repeat until equilibrium is satisfied

Not a unique solution as many other assumed distributions of Xi may also lead to a solution.
Very long and tedious procedure.

Conventional, Fellenius, or Swedish method

Assumptions:
Ei Ei+1 = 0 n-1 assumptions
Xi Xi+1 = 0 n-1 assumptions
Ie for each slice the resultant interslice force is zero
(Since E0 = X0 = 0 then all Ei = 0 and all Xi = 0)
Line of action of P is through centre of circle n assumptions
Total 3n-2
There are n more assumption than required. Only moment equilibrium and one force
equilibrium equation are required. Force equilibrium is not fully satisfied.

Resolve normal to surface to eliminate P

Bishop simplified method

Assumptions:
Xi Xi+1 = 0 (vertical forces) n-1 assumptions
Ie for each slice the resultant interslice force is horizontal (vertical forces are zero)
(Since X0 = 0 then all Xi = 0)
Line of action of P is through centre of circle n assumptions
Total 2n-1

Dr Robert Day, The University of Queensland, 2009

The University of Queensland CIVL3210 Geotechnical Engineering Slope Stability

There is one more assumption than required. Implies that one constraint is not satisfied
(usually H in one slice) Note that horizontal equilibrium is not considered in this
approach.

Spencer method
(Spencer, E, A method of analysis of the stability of embankments assuming parallel interslice
forces, Geotechnique, 17, March 1967, 11-26)

Assumptions:
Assumed parallel interslice forces ie i = i+1
So, Xi/Ei = Xi+1/Ei+1 = constant n-1 assumptions
Line of action of P is through centre of circle n assumptions
Total 2n-1
There is one more assumption than required.
Need to try different values of
i+1

Comparison of methods

For shallow circles Swedish Bishop simplified

For Deep circles Swedish < Bishop simplified (typically)

Eg for an earth dam of rolled clay fill, slope 1 : 2.75

Fs
Bishop 1.61
Bishop simplified 1.53
Conventional / Swedish 1.38

Stability coefficients
Bishop, AW and Morgenstern, NR, Stability coefficients for earth slopes, Geotechnique 10, 129-150, 1960
OConnor, ML & Mitchell, RJ, An extension of the bishop and Morgenstern slope stability
charts. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 14, 144-151, 1977.

It is often not unrealistic to assume the pore pressure is related to the overburden stress.
u = ru ..z
Hence, uibi = ru ..hi.bi = ru.Wi
So using the Bishop simplified assumption equation (2) becomes

1 cb i + Wi (1 ru ) tan

Fs =
Wi .sin i cos i + tan sin i
Fs

Dr Robert Day, The University of Queensland, 2009

The University of Queensland CIVL3210 Geotechnical Engineering Slope Stability

It can be see that Fs is linearly related to ru so we can write Fs = m n.ru

Values of m and n have been calculated and published in charts and tables. Be careful that the
assumptions are applicable.

Non-circular slip surface

Method of slices
If the slip is assumed to be a general shape then the method of slices can still be applied.
However the simple relationship:
Xi = R sin i
no longer applies. Also the normal forces Pi do not all pass through a coincident point. The
point about which moment equilibrium is taken is therefore rather arbitrary. There are still
2n-2 assumptions required for a full solution.

Again there are many published methods

- Janbus simplified method

Assumptions as for Bishops simplified method
Horiz. and vertical equilibrium is used instead of moment and vertical. Moment
equilibrium is not considered

- Morgenstern and Price (Morgenstern, NR & Price VE, The analysis of the stability of general slip
surfaces, Geotechnique 15, 79-93, 1965
Assumes distribution of n ie.
Xi
= f ( x ) where f(x) is a specified function.
Ei
(Similar to the full Bishop method)

Dr Robert Day, The University of Queensland, 2009

The University of Queensland CIVL3210 Geotechnical Engineering Slope Stability

Wedge method
Divide sliding mass into a number of wedges. Use force equilibrium to determine Fs. Moment
equilibrium is not considered.

Unknowns: number
Magnitude of normal force, P (or P) n
Magnitude of shear force, Sn n
Magnitude of inter slice force, R n-1
Line of action of inter slice force, R n-1
Factor of safety, Fs 1
Total 4n - 1

Equations: number
Force equilibrium 2 per slice 2n
Failure criterion sn = c + n tan n
Assumption:
Direction of interwedge force n-1
Total 4n - 1

There is the same number of equations as unknowns. A solution is possible. This is unlikely
to be in moment equilibrium.

Particularly suited to cases where there is very strong or very week layer that will constrain
the failure pattern of a slope.

This lens of week or

strong material will

Dr Robert Day, The University of Queensland, 2009

The University of Queensland CIVL3210 Geotechnical Engineering Slope Stability

Submerged slopes
The only difference to the previous analysis is that the external water force on slope must be
included in the analysis (this adds both a vertical and horizontal force to the slice)
Other points to remember
Equilibrium is in terms of total stress
Soil strength given by effective stress
Calculate pore pressure in the slope using a seepage analysis

Dams / drawdown
Not homogeneous - zoned
Core of low permeability soil
Shoulders of other fill
Include drains
Need to design for stability of slopes

Failure from
Instability of U/S or D/S slopes
Internal erosion fine particles wash out leaving voids and channels
Overtopping Hydrological design failure

Critical conditions for slope stability

During (or end of ) construction
o Pore pressure in fill depends on placement water content and duration
o Partial dissipation of pore pressures
o Difficult to determine pore pressure
o Effective stress analysis is preferred
o Total stress analysis is too conservative
o Fs > 1.3 if reasonable confidence in parameters
Steady Seepage
o Usual condition
o Pore pressure from seepage analysis
o Effective stress analysis
o Fs > 1.5
Rapid drawdown
o Water level in dam is suddenly reduced
o Water needs time to drain from slope
o Upstream face effected
o Change in total stress is q
o Pore pressure changes immediately also by q (since it is undrained)
o The effective stress and hence strength is unchanged
o The stabilising effect of the external water pressure is removed
o The slope is less stable
o Undrained analysis is most applicable but it is difficult to determine the
distribution of cu
o Effective stress analysis is usually performed
o Fs > 1.2

Dr Robert Day, The University of Queensland, 2009

 The University of Queensland CIVL3210 Geotechnical Engineering Slope Stability

Natural slopes Stabilisation methods

Stabilization only required of there is a problem Social or economic

Usually slips in clay slopes are shallow, rather than deep seated circular arcs seen in
embankments. Probably because of weak layers generated by historical and environmental
events.

Reinforcing
piles, anchors, grouting, retaining walls
costly

Slope geometry reduce shear stress

slope angle
berm
height

Excavate reduce height

Fill berm

Pore pressure drainage reduce pore pressure

surface drainage
deep drainage
cheap, first approach

Dr Robert Day, The University of Queensland, 2009